guildwarsfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Action prevention skills quick reference
There is also skill "disabling" quick reference. Should it be just added to this or a separate reference? By this I mean Blackout, Arcane Thievery, ... --Karlos 06:03, 6 October 2006 (CDT) :Fail != Disable, Fail prevents an action from happening at all (not the case with SB but meh), while disabling is an action that stops the another action from happening. Xeon 07:23, 16 December 2006 (CST) :On second thoughts, where does the interrupt qr fit into all this. Xeon 07:25, 16 December 2006 (CST) :ah ok got it. mixed them around a bit. Fail prevents any action from happening on the target. Disable changes the skill recharge time of a target and interrupt is an action that cancels another action. They are all related yet different. Xeon 07:28, 16 December 2006 (CST) I'm fairly sure Mirror of Ice shouldn't be in this reference. It doesn't cause any spells to fail, it just negates damage from the spell. PedroPickles 23:42, 7 February 2007 (CST) :Removed it and hex breaker. --Fyren 23:47, 7 February 2007 (CST) ::I double-checked but i'm fairly sure that hex breaker does cause failure.....when i read its description i see "For 15...75 seconds, the next time you are the target of a "Hex", that Hex fails, the caster takes 10...39 damage. It is only a failure of hexes, but failure nonetheless. I would revert it myself but I haven't learned the wiki code very well yet and I'm afraid I'd break something >:3 PedroPickles 00:10, 8 February 2007 (CST) :::Nope. What actually happens is the target just doesn't get hexed. Any other effects still occur. Also, the skill begins its usual recharge afterwards. --Fyren 00:14, 8 February 2007 (CST) ::::I see. So the wiki considers a skill causing "failure" as one that causes an instant recharge on failure and having the other effects occur as opposed to using skills which have the wording "fail" in them? =p Thanks for clearing that up =). In that case, "Can't Touch This!" should probably be added if it works in the manner that I remember. Looks like I'll have to start catching up on formatting in the wiki so I can do these things myself =) PedroPickles 00:18, 8 February 2007 (CST) :::::Skill descriptions are usually either wrong, imprecise, or too simple to screw up, heh. --Fyren 00:21, 8 February 2007 (CST) What about self-failing skills, like Gale? (Terra Xin 21:36, 12 February 2007 (CST)) :I don't think anyone would ever be interested in looking up a list of them. --Fyren 04:22, 13 February 2007 (CST) The headers are abbreviated so they don't expand the columns (well, "Cam" still does anyway). --Fyren 00:36, 5 March 2007 (CST) Obsidian Flesh and Vow of Silence don't belong here They don't cause skill failure, they just prevent spell targeting. i.e. you don't lose energy (nor incur exhaustion), but just get a message "target is protected". See also fail, which explicitly mentions obsidian flesh being something different. 134.130.4.46 10:30, 16 July 2007 (CDT) :Yes they do, they prevent someone from casting a spell on a person, so the spell has failed to be cast. Doesn't matter if they cant be targeted or not or if they lose energy. -- Xeon 10:45, 16 July 2007 (CDT) ::For the English word "fail", that would be correct, but "fail" or "skill failure" are technical game terms, whose meaning is clearly defined (see either article, both definitions clearly exclude obsi/vos). It's the same as with "interrupt" really: just because the skill doeesn't complete casting (i.e. is interrupted in the English sense of the word) it's not interrupted in the game meaning, and hence knockdowns, fail skills, disablement skills.. are not listed in Interrupt skills quick reference, which has been clearly established for quite some time now. 134.130.4.46 11:08, 16 July 2007 (CDT) :::The quick reference dont only follow the game mechanics but are also built for convenience around readers, which is why knockdown, skill failure are placed into their own categories instead of placed into the interrupt article. There isnt going to be a quick reference which lists two skills, when there is already a quick reference that has nearly the exact same skill property requirements. There is no difference between the "fail" and "skill failure" articles, the articles should be merged and redirected. The article needs to be fixed up as well, some of the wording is misleading. If someone doesn't do it by the end of the week, I will. -- Xeon 16:39, 16 July 2007 (CDT) ::::Convenience is a very good point, and I'd be fine with them in the same list IF the difference is clearly noted. As it is now, you can't tell that a target protected by Obsidian Flesh is any different from one protected by Spellbreaker. It is, That's often important and I think it's the quick reference's job to point it out. Would that be ok with you? (I'd go ahead and do it right now, but my wiki time is currently limited). 134.130.4.46 20:50, 17 July 2007 (CDT) :::Big Question here is, what is the purpose of this quick reference anyway? Shame and Obsidian Flesh in the same list? Might as well make a quick reference for all skills beginning with O. Would be equally useful. If you want convenience over correctness of technical terms then i would put guilt, shame and the like into the interrupt quick reference and obsi, spellbreaker and stuff into a spell protection quick reference, or what ever you want to call it. Or when was the last time you couldn't decide between obsidian flesh or shame to use in your build? :::But if you want to keep this quick reference, then i would have to agree with 134.130.4.46. The only reason i could ever think of looking up skill failure skills would really be if i was looking for skills which cause skill failure in the technical sense, meaning the foe looses energy and all the stuff that happens on failure, and then obsi and vow of silence are really misplaced here. And if you, for some strange reason i yet can't grasp, really want a quick reference of all spells which could cause skill failure in a general, non technical, sense, then you would have to add all interrupts, all knock downs, actually even all energy drains. Not to mention skills like vocal minority, well of silence, well of the profane and the like. 134.130.183.235 21:39, 17 July 2007 (CDT) ::::Foe casts meteor at you at 1s. You use Obsidian Flesh at 2s. Meteor fails at 3.99s right? 67.162.10.70 21:47, 17 July 2007 (CDT) :::::Well, your numbers are a little bit confusing but your idea is right. Same works with blackout btw, or some of the other spells i mentioned above which are currently not in the list. So thanks for proofing my point how both senseless and incomplete the list currently is, and how even more senseless it would become if you would add all other skills which could cause skill failure in a non technical way. 134.130.183.235 22:09, 17 July 2007 (CDT) ::::::@134.130.4.46, you can add notes like that to the note section through the skill core template. ::::::@134.130.183.235 I used this when i found it... To make a tanking build for some PvE areas. I think you fail to understand the distinct differences between this qr and the interrupt qr, as i defined earlier in this talk page "Fail prevents any action from happening on the target (protects a character before the action happens on the character, passive protection). Disable changes the skill recharge time of a target and interrupt is an action that cancels another action (interrupts the action as it happens).". A qr does not define what is interchangeable, that is what is the skill article, related skills section is for. Would i use obsidian over shame? It is not for this qr to decide. These list skills that have a single very closely related property. -- Xeon 07:32, 18 July 2007 (CDT) :::::::Ok, please take some time to carefully read what Shame does and then do the same with Obsidian Flesh. After that reflect about it for some time. Then reread your sentence where you claim i fail to understand the difference between skills like Guilt and Power Leak, which are different, i never denied that, but at least have a common purpose, which is canceling one enemy spell. Reflect about it a little bit more. Than reread your sentence about the usefulness of this article for making a tanking build and again reflect on what Shame does. Then think about my suggestion to have a spell protection quick reference, including spells like obsidian flesh and spellbreaker, maybe even call it different and including mistform and "can't touch this", and think about how much more useful that would have been for your purpose. :::::::After that reread your above statement that skill quickreferences do not care about game mechanics but only about the readers convenience and look what Blackout and Guilt do. They use completely different game mechanics, i agree with that, so does obsidian flesh and spellbreaker, but you allready pointed out that this is not what quickreferences are about. And if you ignore the difference in game mechanics, they suddenly do very similar things, precastable skill use prevention. :::::::However you turn it, and regardless if this skill list is usefull or not, it will always either have skills that don't belong there, like obsidian flesh which does not cause skill failure in terms of game mechanics, or will lack skills like blackout, which causes skill failure NOT in terms of game mechanics. 134.130.183.235 09:32, 18 July 2007 (CDT) ::::::::Do not mock me. I know exactly what i said and i know what each of the skills do. I think the name of the quick reference is incorrect rather then the skills. Action prevention skills quick reference or Skill use prevention skills quick reference? With the strict guideline that it prevents an action from happening over a period of time (this does not include skills that have secondary preventions, like snares so people cant attack a target), this way shame and obsidian are listed. It can then be further segmented into target ally prevention and target foe prevention. My main goal is to keep the skills within the same article because they contain very similar properties. -- Xeon 11:02, 18 July 2007 (CDT) :::::::::No mocking intended. Just getting a bit impatient lately if people don't get my point. Had and saw some discussions here where people would not even read what they were responding to. :::::::::But back to the topic, i still think blackout would belong in this list, because it does exactly what you describe, just with another mechanic. I would call it action prevention skills quick reference (to include mistform) and as suggested above, would split it into 2 tables, one with the buffs (Obsidian flesh, spellbreaker, spellshield, vow of silence, mistform, cant touch this etc.) and one with the hostile hexes/spells/skills (shame, guilt, blackout, mistrust, mark of subversion...). The table should have a action column informing about what kind of action is prevented. Attacks with mistform, spells with obsidian flesh, hostile spells with guilt, beneficial spells with shame, skills with blackout, touch skills with "don't touch this" etc. Vocal minority (shouts/chants) and well of the profane (enchantments) would also be candidates for the 2nd table. If you are not comfortable with mixing them they could be further segmented, either by splitting the table of the "target foe" skills or by sorting them accordingly, into those that work only on next action (shame, guilt, mistrust, mark of subversion) and those that work for a set time (blackout, vocal minority, well of profane). 134.130.183.235 11:48, 18 July 2007 (CDT) :(reset) I assure you, i read over comments many times to make sure i understand the persons point of view and not just mine. Blackout falls into Disable skills quick reference and you will find many of these skills following the same principle, where the skill will fail at the end of its cast. We can add a disamb note and link to them that way to indicate these will cause a skill to "fail". Columns should be Name, Target, Prevents, followed by the other standard qr columns. obsid, sb and others need to be updated to say if they reduce energy. I will do this tomorrow unless someone else gets to it and i will fix the fail article as well. -- Xeon 12:59, 18 July 2007 (CDT)